A

common practice in the chemi-

cal process industries (CPI) is
to implement so-called value-
maximization projects (VMP) to
increase production or reduce produc-
tion costs in order to increase profit
margins. With such projects, one main
objective of the design team is to incur
minimum capital expenditures.
Because most VMPs aim to increase
throughput or production yield, many
such projects involve changes to the
process that result in an increase in
the volume of feed flowing into a gas-
liquid separator (GLS). The system
modifications that are required often
call for:
t5IFEFTJHOPGBOFX(-4UPBDDPN-
modate the increased flow, or
t5IFNPEJGJDBUJPOPGUIFWFTTFMJOUFS-
nals and associated piping to handle
the increased feed flow
Increased feed flow into any GLS can
lead to the entrainment of gases into
the liquid lines. Such gas entrainment
can lead to pulsating flows in the line,
which can result in vibration and po-
tentially destabilize the downstream
processes. In many cases where GLS
are provided with gravity-flow pipe-
lines a common approach, as it pro-
vides an inexpensive way to transport
liquids the use of self-venting pipe-
lines coupled with properly sized vortex
breakers can mitigate the problem of
entrainment of gases into liquid lines.
Theoretical basis
A typical GLS arrangement with
gravity flow is shown in Figure 1. The
operating pressure of the first vessel
(V-1) is P
0
(psig) and its oper-
ating temperature is T
0
(F). The
operating pressure and temperature
of the second vessel (V-2) are P
2
and
T
2
, respectively.
The pressure and temperature of
the liquid at the exit nozzle of V-1
are P
1
and T
1
, respectively. In Figure
1, the region from the exit of V-1 to
the inlet of V-2 is highlighted with a
dashed outline. It shows that the as-
sociated piping of the system consists
of pipes and elbows.
The following assumptions are con-
sidered for this system:
t -JRVJE GMPXJOH UISPVHI UIF MJOF JT
incompressible
t 5IFTZTUFNJTJOTUFBEZTUBUF
t 5IFSFJTOPGMBTIJOHPGMJRVJE
t 1SFTTVSFT P
0
, P
1
and P
2
are con-
stant
t 5IFQJQFTJ[FJTVOJGPSN
System equations
Step 1. The pipeline is sized for liquid
flow using a conventional line-sizing
approach for typical velocity consider-
ations and least annual cost. Table 1
shows typical liquid velocities in steel
pipelines.
Table 1 shows typical velocities in
steel pipelines with liquid flow [3].
It provides a good estimate for the
preliminary selection of the pipeline
size with respect to its nominal bore
(N.B.) dimensions. As Table 1 provides
generalized data, readers can use the
values provided for any type of pipes,
irrespective of metallurgy or material
of construction.
By applying the lowest-annual-cost
approach as stated by Moharir [3],
the cost of the pipe material per unit
length for a run of pipe with diameter
D is calculated using Equation (1):
(1)
Along with the pipe, the cost of accesso-
ries and fittings must also be factored
in, hence their number must also be
computed on a per-unit-length basis.
For instance, if a pipeline of 100 ft has
5 gate valves, 4 long-radius elbows of
90 deg, 2 tees and 7 weld joints, then its
per-unit fitting cost can be taken col-
lectively as a factor F. If the amortiza-
tion rate is A
M
and the annual mainte-
nance cost is a fraction G of the capital
cost, then the annualized capital plus
maintenance cost of the pipeline, C
P
, is
calculated using Equation (2):
Feature Report
42 CHEMICAL ENGINEERING WWW.CHE.COM JUNE 2011
Engineering Practice
D
o
l
l
a
r

p
e
r

y
e
a
r

p
e
r

f
o
o
t

o
f

p
i
p
e
Nominal pipe size, ft
20
15
10
5
0
1 2 3 4 6 8
FIGURE 1. Shown here is a typical
gas-liquid separator, with gravity fow
from V-1 to V-2 [1]
Reduce Gas Entrainment
In Liquid Lines
P
0
T
0
P
1
, T
1
h
H
0
H
1
H
2
Ground
V-1
V-2 P
2
, T
2
FIGURE 2. The relationship between
amortized capital cost per foot of pipe
and nominal pipe size is shown here [3]
Follow these tips to properly size
self-venting lines and vortex breakers
Tamagna Ukil and Thomas Mathew
Reliance Industries Ltd.
(2)
Rearranging Equations (1) and (2)
produces Equation (3):
(3)
In most cases, another component,
C
F
, is needed to calculate is the oper-
ating cost. However, in this case, the
operating cost component C
F
is not
considered due to the absence of any
rotary equipment. Differentiating C
P

with respect to D, to obtain optimum
diameter of the pipeline (Db) and set-
ting it to zero, Equation (3) can then
be simplified as follows:
(4)
Figure 2 shows the relationship be-
tween the amortized annual cost per
unit length of pipe (ft) and nominal
pipe size (nominal bore).
From the two methods described
above, Db is obtained as an initial
line size in terms of nominal pipe size
(nominal bore) of the pipe.
Step 2. The next step is to carry out
the Froude number analysis for the
line using the diameter obtained from
Step 1. As per Simpsons article [2], if
the fluid inside a vessel does not ro-
tate and if the liquid level in the ves-
sel is below a certain height, then gas
will get sucked into the liquid line. A
conservative estimate of this level was
derived by Harleman et al. [1], Harle-
mans equation is:
(5)
Equation (5) can be used to estimate
the height of the liquid inside V-1
below which the gas would be sucked
into the liquid line.
Experiments on 13/16-in. pipeline
and on 1-in. to 4-in. pipelines by Simp-
son and Webb [2], respectively, show
that if the Froude number in the pipe-
line is less than 0.31, then gas will not
be entrained. If the Froude number
of the liquid flowing in the pipeline
is greater than 0.31, then gas starts
getting swept up by the liquid. High,
two-phase pulsating flow is observed
when the Froude number is between
0.31 and 1.
This is the basis of design for self-
venting lines: Any provision for self-
venting lines should ensure that the
Froude number remains between 0
and 0.31. The typical velocity of liq-
uid in self-venting pipelines is in the
range of 1 ft/s.
Step 3. When the flow inside a vessel
is rotational, vortex breakers should
be provided to prevent gas entrain-
ment into liquid lines. If V-1 has a
feed entry point that is tangential
to the vessel, it will induce a swirl-
ing motion in the liquid, like a whirl-
pool. If this swirling motion is strong
enough to reach the liquid exit nozzle
of V-1, then it would lead to entrain-
ment of gas into the liquid pipeline.
Borgheis experiments [4] in pipe-
lines of 2-in. to 4-in. show that vortex
breakers with dimensions double the
nominal bore of the pipe are highly
efficient in reducing the vortex effect
inside the vessel.
Thus in V-1, with a self-venting liq-
uid exit line, the vortex breaker ar-
rangement should be in the form of a
cross (+). When the vertical and hori-
zontal dimension of the plates that are
used to fabricate the vortex breaker
have a dimension of 2D, each can
substantially reduce the entrainment
of gas into the liquid exit. The steps
described above can be summarized in
the flowsheet shown in Figure 3.
CHEMICAL ENGINEERING WWW.CHE.COM JUNE 2011 43
TABLE 1. TYPICAL VELOCITIES IN STEEL PIPELINES
WITH LIQUID FLOW [3]
Nominal pipe size, in. 2 or less 3 to 10 10 to 20
Liquid and line
Velocity,
ft/s
Velocity,
ft/s
Velocity,
ft/s
Water
Pump suction 1 to 2 2 to 4 3 to 6
Pump discharge (long) 2 to 3 3 to 5 4 to 7
Discharge heads (short) 4 to 9 5 to 12 8 to 14
Boiler feed 5 to 9 5 to 12 8 to 14
Drains 3 to 4 3 to 5
Sloped sewer 3 to 5 4 to 7
Hydrocarbon liquids
(Normal viscosities) 1.5 to 2.2 2 to 4 3 to 6
Pump suction 2.5 to 3.5 3 to 5 4 to 7
Discharge heads (long) 4 to 9 5 to 12 8 to 15
Boiler feed 3 to 4 3 to 5
Drains
Viscous oils
Pump suction
Medium viscosity 1.5 to 3 2.5 to 5
Tar and fuel oils 0.4 to 0.75 0.5 to 1
Discharge (short) 3 to 5 4 to 6
Drains 1 1.5 to 3
NO
YES
Start
Optimize the diameter using
annual cost approach to get D'
Select the D' and
size vortex breakers
Vortex breakers to be
of 2D X 2D dimension
Stop
Obtain initial pipe diameter
using Table 1
Check D' < 0.31
Select the N.B.
of pipe such that
D' < 0.31
FIGURE 3. This fowsheet illustrates the types of deci-
sions that must be made to properly size gravity fow lines
and vortex breakers, to reduce gas entrainment
Engineering Practice
44 CHEMICAL ENGINEERING WWW.CHE.COM JUNE 2011
The following conclusions can be
made from the discussion above:
1. The line size full of liquid will al-
ways be smaller than the self-vent-
ing line.
2. The work described in Refs. 2 and 4
are based on small lines (up to 4-in.
nominal bore).
3. If liquid flow varies during
operation, the pipe should be sized
to accommodate the maximum
possible flow.
4. Dbb obtained from Equation 5
should be rounded off to the higher
nominal bore of pipe of standard
available size.
Edited by Suzanne Shelley
References
1. Yu, F.C., Hydrocarbon Proc., Nov. 1997.
2. Simpson, L.L., Chem. Eng., June 17, 1960, p. 191.
3. Moharir, A.S., Pipe hydraulics and sizing, IIT
Bombay, May 7, 2008.
4. Borghei, S.M. Partial reduction of vortex in verti-
cal intake pipe, Scientiairanica, Vol 17, Issue 2.
Authors
Tamagna Ukil is the Man-
ager of PTA-Process at Reli-
ance Industries Ltd. (Reliance
Corporate Park, Ghansoli, 7-B
Ground Floor, Navi Mumbai
Maharashtra, India; Phone:
+912-244-783-452; Email:
tamaga.ukil@ril.com). He
holds a B.S.Ch.E. from Utkal
University. He is a Certi-
fied Piping Engineer from
IIT Bombay, and has been
working with Reliance Technology Group, PTA
Division, to provide advanced technical services
in the field of design, simulation and process
optimization for the manufacture of purified
terephthalic acid (PTA).
Thomas Mathew is presi-
dent of Reliance Industries
Ltd. He graduated as a Chem-
ical Engineer from Kerala
University (Trichur Engineer-
ing College), and spent the
first 16 years of his career
involved in the production of
ammonia from numerous raw
materials, including natural
gas, naphtha, fuel oil and coal.
Mathew participated in the
startup of two coal gasification plants and served
as plant manager for five years in the coal gas-
ification plant at Ramagundam, India. He joined
Reliance in 1985 and took charge of the com-
missioning and startup of several petrochemical
plants, before heading the manufacturing opera-
tions of the Reliances Patalganga Complex. He
leads the Centre of Excellence in PTA and Gasifi-
cation within Reliance.
WHY MONITOR POWER INSTEAD OF JUST AMPS?
NO LOAD NO LOAD
Power is Linear-Equal Sensitivity
at Both Low and High Loads
No Sensitivity
For Low Loads
FULL LOAD FULL LOAD
P
O
W
E
R
A
M
P
S
WWW.LOADCONTROLS.COM
CALL NOW FOR YOUR FREE 30-DAY TRIAL 888-600-3247
PROTECT PUMPS
$2925..).'s#A6)4!4)/.s"%!2).'&!),52%s/6%2,/!$
MONITOR PUMP POWER
Best 8ensitivit]
Digital Displa]
TWO ADJUSTABLE SET POINTS
Rela] 0utputs
Adjustaole Dela] Timers
4-20 MILLIAMP ANALOG OUTPUT
COMPACT EASY MOUNTING
0nl] 8.25" x O.25" x 2"
8tarter Door Panel
Racewa] wall
UNIQUE RANGE FINDER SENSOR
works on wide-range of Notors
8implifes lnstallation
PUMP POWER
PUMPING
VALVE CLOSING
VALVE OPENING
NO FLUID
Circle 16 on p. 62 or go to adlinks.che.com/35066-16
NOMENCLATURE
A
M
Amortized cost per unit length of
pipe, $/ft
C
D
Cost per unit length of pipe, $/ft
C
P
Total capital cost per unit length of
pipe, $/ft
F Pipe fitting cost per unit length of
pipe, $/ft
G Maintenance cost per unit length of
pipe, $/ft
g Acceleration due to gravity, ft/s
2
h Height inside V-1, ft
D Initial pipe dia., in.
D Optimum pipe dia., in.
D Dia. of self-venting line, in.
P
0
, P
1
, P
2
Pressure shown in Fig. 1, psig
T
0
, T
1
, T
2
Temperature shown in
Figure 1, F
V Velocity of the liquid through the
pipeline, ft/s
X Cost per unit length of 2-in. nomi-
nal bore pipe of the same material
and schedule, $/ft